Relating Coalition Capacity to the Adoption of Science-Based Prevention in Communities: Evidence from a Randomized Trial of Communities That Care
Coalition-based efforts that use a science-based approach to prevention can improve the wellbeing of community youth. This study measured several coalition capacities that are hypothesized to facilitate the adoption of a science-based approach to prevention in communities. Using data from 12 coalitions participating in a community-randomized trial of the prevention strategy Communities That Care (CTC), this paper describes select measurement properties of five salient coalition capacities (member substantive knowledge of prevention, member acquisition of new skills, member attitudes toward CTC, organizational linkages, and influence on organizations), as reported by coalition members, and examines the degree to which these capacities facilitated the community leader reports of the community-wide adoption of a science-based approach to prevention. Findings indicated that the five coalition capacities could be reliably measured using coalition member reports. Meta-regression analyses found that CTC had a greater impact on the adoption of a science-based prevention approach in 12 matched pairs of control and CTC communities where the CTC coalition had greater member (new skill acquisition) and organizational capacities (organizational linkages).
KeywordsCommunities that care Prevention Coalition Capacity Adoption Evidence–based practice
This work was supported by a research grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01 DA015183-01A1) with co-funding from the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, and the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, and training grants from the National Institute of Mental Health (T32 MH20012) and the Society for Social Work and Research. The content of this paper is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies. The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of the communities participating in the Community Youth Development Study and the thoughtful manuscript review by Dr. Peter Pecora.
- Arthur, M. W., Ayers, C. D., Graham, K. A., & Hawkins, J. D. (2003). Mobilizing communities to reduce risks for drug abuse: A comparison of two strategies. In W. J. Bukoski & Z. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of drug abuse prevention: Theory, science and practice (pp. 129–144). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.Google Scholar
- Arthur, M. W., Glaser, R. R., & Hawkins, J. D. (2005). Steps towards community-level resilience: Community adoption of science-based prevention programming. In R. D. Peters, B. Leadbeater, & R. J. McMahon (Eds.), Resilience in children, families, and communities: Linking context to practice and policy (pp. 177–194). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Brown, E. C., Hawkins, J. D., Rhew, I. C., Shapiro, V. B., Abbott, R.D., Arthur, M. W., Briney, J. S., & Catalano, R. F. (2014). Prevention system mediation of Communities That Care effects on youth outcomes. Prevention Science, 15(5), 623–632.Google Scholar
- Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence. (2011). Blueprints for violence prevention. Retrieved from http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints.
- Chervin, D. D., Philliber, S., Brindis, C. D., Chadwick, A. E., Revels, M. L., Kamin, S. L., et al. (2005). Community capacity building in CDC’s community coalition partnership programs for the prevention of teen pregnancy. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37(3 Suppl.), S11–S19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 (Updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration. Google Scholar
- Crowley, D. M., Greenberg, M. T., Feinberg, M. E., Spoth, R. L., & Redmond, C. R. (2012). The effect of the PROSPER partnership model on cultivating local stakeholder knowledge of evidence-based programs: A five-year longitudinal study of 28 communities. Prevention Science, 13(1), 96–105.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goodman, R. M., Wandersman, A., Chinman, M., Imm, P., & Morrissey, E. (1996). An ecological assessment of community-based interventions for prevention and health promotion: Approaches to measuring community coalitions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24(1), 33–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Halgunseth, L. C., Carmack, C., Childs, S. S., Caldwell, L., Craig, A., & Smith, E. P. (2012). Using the interactive systems framework in understanding the relation between general program capacity and implementation in afterschool settings. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50(3–4), 311–320.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Arthur, M. W., Egan, E., Brown, E. C., Abbott, R. D., et al. (2008). Testing Communities That Care: The rationale, design and behavioral baseline equivalence of the Community Youth Development Study. Prevention Science, 9(3), 178–190.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Associates. (1992). Communities That Care: Action for drug abuse prevention (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Kegler, M. C., Williams, C. W., Cassell, C. M., Santelli, J., Kegler, S. R., Montgomery, S. B., et al. (2005). Mobilizing communities for teen pregnancy prevention: Associations between coalition characteristics and perceived accomplishments. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37, S31–S41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Raudenbush, S. W. (1994). Random effects models. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 301–321). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Shapiro, V. B., Hawkins, J. D., Oesterle, S., Monahan, K. C., Brown, E. C., & Arthur, M. W. (2013b). Variation in the effect of Communities That Care on the adoption of a scientific approach to prevention. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Social Research, 4(3), 154–164.Google Scholar
- Shapiro, V. B., Oesterle, S., Abbott, R. D., Arthur, M. W., & Hawkins, J. D. (2013a). Measuring dimensions of coalition functioning for effective and participatory community practice. Social Work Research, 37(4), 349–359.Google Scholar
- Spoth, R., Redmond, C., Clair, S., Shin, C., Greenberg, M., & Feinberg, M. (2011). Preventing substance misuse through community-university partnerships: Randomized controlled trial outcomes 4(1/2) years past baseline. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 40(4), 440–447.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2005). Communities That Care prevention strategies guide. Retrieved from http://ncadi.samhsa.gov/features/ctc/resources.aspx.
- Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flasphohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., et al. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3), 171–181.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wilson, D. B. (2005). Meta-analysis macros for SAS, SPSS, and Stata. Retrieved from http://mason.gmu.edu/~dwilsonb/ma.html.